Tuesday, January 31, 2012

What I find most interesting is that Romney got more votes than those who finished 3rd and 4th, combined. Not even in New Hampshire did Romney achieve this, though he was close (he had 39.3% of the vote to Paul’s 22.9% and Huntsman’s 16.9%).

It’s hard to say what will happen to Santorum. Candidates are known for being optimistic until the day they drop out, like when Huntsman delivered his “ticket to ride” speech after getting third in New Hampshire, before dropping out days later. One can’t even look at where a candidate has campaigned heavily, as Perry put his heart and soul into South Carolina, but dropped before the vote due to abysmal poll numbers.

Paul has been focusing on Maine, where the state’s caucus has started early. While it was “recommended” that the caucuses run from Feb. 4th through the 11th, a handful of counties have already begun. Seeing no hope in Florida, which assigns delegates on a winner-take-all basis, Paul has shrewdly focused on states like Maine, Nevada and Minnesota. Since Gingrich and Santorum are walking away from Florida with nothing to show for their effort, Paul is actually poised to come away with more delegates earned this week than both of them, combined.

I’m of the opinion that Paul’s campaign is not aiming to win the nomination, but to pave the way for libertarianism within the Republican Party. While he has been making all the smart moves for someone in his situation, pragmatically choosing the best methods available to him to gain delegates, I have a feeling it’s more about ideology than Paul himself. I’m still confident it will be Paul and Romney at the end, and it will be interesting to see whether there will be any Romney/Paul debates before the convention (Romney may very well decline to attend such a debate, because he would have nothing to gain by showing up).

With the results from Florida now official, Romney is once again the undisputed frontrunner with all the momentum. This was the sense going into the primary today, based on debate performances and polling, but Romney must be breathing a deep sigh of release after his loss in South Carolina, where he had been polling ahead of Gingrich by double digits just a week before the primary.

However, there are already murmurs among political analysts about whether Romney can win support, or if he’s only capable of tearing down his opponents. His strategy of outspending the opposition with attack ads is working now, but it probably won’t cut it in the general election, where Obama has the advantage, both monetarily and substantively.

Obama has been in full campaign mode since the State of the Union, which essentially served as his preliminary case for re-election. Expect him to focus on aspects of his presidency where he has excelled, namely his foreign policy decisions. The wedge issues this year are still up in the air, but I wouldn’t be surprised if classics like taxes, gay marriage, regulations, and illegal immigration pop up, joined by timely problems like income inequality and unemployment.

Whatever does come up in the general election, we’ll hear more about it than any prior contest. The sheer volume of advertising is expected to surpass all previous years, so when you’re trying to enjoy the Olympics this summer but you can’t, because every 10 minutes you are reminded of why you hate politics, remember (and thank) Citizens United.

perhaps it seems obvious that it is in the interests of poor people to have an extremely powerful and pervasive state; perhaps it seems obvious that it is in the interests of rich people to have a tiny powerless state. however, looking at the thing squarely, this is the opposite of obvious. it seems obvious because people keep repeating it or always conceive the terrain this way. but it's just wackily false with regard to reality. who needs the state more: you know, robert rubin or rodney king? the idea that robert just wants to be left alone while rodney wants to be constantly entwined in police and welfare programs seems rather odd. or: which of these people needs to be left alone, and which coddled or beaten? when the state leaves robert rubin alone, he'll be broke. when it leaves rodney king alone, he'll have better brain scans.

RTs Alyona Minkovski does what none of the Banksters-controlled MSM talking heads do: She rips apart current Offense Secretary Leon Panetta on his Fascist "rationale" of why a U.S. Murderer-in-Chief can murder any human being without due process so long as the Murder-in-Chief deems such person a "terrorist" or "enemy combatant.

Monday, January 30, 2012

After an upset loss to Gingrich, thanks largely to weak debate performances in South Carolina, don’t expect Romney to drop the ball in Florida. It’s the biggest state up to this point, but Florida was part of a bloc of states that were penalized by the RNC for moving their primaries earlier.

The following states lost/will lose half their delegates: New Hampshire (from 23 to 12), South Carolina (from 50 to 25), Florida (from 99 to 50), Arizona (from 58 to 29), and Michigan (from 59 to 30). Iowa kept their full delegation (28), as will Nevada (28), Maine (24), Colorado (37), Minnesota (50), Missouri (52), and Washington (43). Those are all the states leading up to Super Tuesday.

Florida will be a study in demographics. As well as being the biggest state in the race until Texas’ primary on April 3rd, Florida is arguably the most diverse voter population thus far. While there has been considerable attention given to the Latino vote, this is a closed primary, and Latinos are not traditionally registered as Republican.

While the Latino vote is worth considering, I think the important group to go after will be seniors and women, which are actually linked in Florida. Because women have a longer life expectancy, and Florida is full of retirees, there’s a lot of older women expected to hit the polls Tuesday. This bodes well for Romney, who is notably well liked among women, more than the other candidates (especially Gingrich).

Gingrich also had weak, often unfocused performances at the post-South Carolina debates. It’s looking like Gingrich will still take second place, but it wouldn’t surprise me if Santorum nips at his heels or even overtakes him.

A second place finish for Santorum just might provide him the momentum to stay in the race longer than he ever should have. Santorum is basically running on fumes, and his very presence in the race serves only to split the neoconservative vote with Gingrich. A poor showing in Florida (which he is projected to experience) may be the nail in his campaign’s coffin.

Some analysts are also picking Paul to have a good showing, so long as the historically unreliable youth/college vote experiences good turnout (he will benefit from this later date, compared to South Carolina’s primary, when many colleges were still out for Winter break). Paul has largely ignored Florida, wisely citing the delegate penalty and the sheer cost of trying to compete in a race as large and expensive as Florida. He has primarily focused on upcoming races in Nevada and Minnesota, but he is also expected to perform well in Maine.

The biggest story is not so much who will win Florida, but how will the survivors continue? Gingrich and Romney have run nasty campaigns, and while Romney is still likely to be the nominee, it’s hard to believe he will come out of this race for the nomination as popular as he was going on… and this is Romney we’re talking about.

Romney was so universally unappealing, everyone from Trump to Palin to Perry to Bachman to Cain to Santorum has spent a moment in the limelight as the “ideal” opponent to supplant the bitter medicine that is Mitt Romney. Romney needs a spoonful of sugar to make his campaign palatable at this point, and a solid VP pick may be just the trick .

Even if he makes all the right moves from here on out, Romney will have a tough, uphill climb to overtake an incumbent Obama, who has more money for propaganda advertising. I’ve already seen Obama commercials on TV, and my wife has seen banner ads on websites. I live in a swing state, so I’m just now getting a small taste of the crap people in South Carolina and Florida have dealt with.

Lew Rockwell discusses Newt Gingrich's lie about supporting Barry Goldwater when he really worked for Nelson Rockefeller, Gingrich's declaration that conservatives must support FDR and why Gingrich has got the 'crazy bug'

I might have to, for personal reasons. That means I'll be posting mostly videos and possibly a few short pieces with links, not my regular, more involved posts. If this does indeed take place, then I thank you in advance for your understanding.

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Well, first it was pork rinds and now, bacon. I even bought one of those Makin Bacon things to cook it in the microwave with. It does drain all the grease away, but I really didn't have to wait to buy one to start cooking bacon in the microwave oven. All I needed was a plate. Imagine that!

Some girl (yeah, stick that in your pipe and smoke it, Mr. Radfem Tremblay!) at work started bringing bacon and eggs to work in the morning and leaving the aroma of bacon all down the hallway. I copied her when she said she'd lost six pounds in a week. Only I had to get the hang of microwaving bacon. My first try I overcooked it for fear of undercooking it. It also came out as a big clump, and was more like beef jerky than bacon. Then I learned to adjust the time and spread my bacon slices out on the plate more. I've been smelling up the break room ever since and have no plans to stop. No one minds the smell, by the way, unlike with many other food smells. Instead, I get comments like "Nick, your bacon is making me hungry" and "That smells so good!". Proves to me that bacon is special and irresistible.

My one difference with my bacon and eggs loving co-worker is she scrambles her eggs and cooks them up that way in a cup while I bring my microwave egg poacher and cook my fresh eggs that way. They come out perfect and go well with the bacon. Still, I think I'll simplify things this week and just scramble my eggs. That way I won't have anything to wash up after breakfast (the company provides paper plates and cups).

Anonymous stands with the farmers and food organizations denouncing the practices of Monsanto We applaud the bravery of the organizations and citizens who are standing up to Monsanto, and we stand united with you against this oppressive corporate abuse. Monsanto is contaminating the world with chemicals and genetically modified food crops for profit while claiming to feed the hungry and protect the environment.

Some amongst those who had been campaigning against SOPA and PIPA did not know that the US government already had the authority to shut down entire websites and in fact has exercised that authority on numerous occasions. What many are now learning is that, far from some potential future threat, internet censorship already exists in a variety of legislation that is already on the books in the United States and in nations around the world.

Although most commonly associated with China, which has implemented strict internet filters that prevent its citizens from finding politically sensitive material, various internet censorship programs have already been implemented by countries around the globe.

Mohammad Marandi, an associate professor of American Studies at Tehran University, told Al Jazeera: "If Western regimes try to strangle the Iranian people and to hurt the Iranian economy severely, then the Iranians will have no option but to punish them."

We always hear in polling data that Congress has an extremely low approval rating (currently at 13%) but that people would re-elect their own congressman. Maybe that's about to change with a majority now stating they want ALL of them thrown out of office:

The personal computer may soon be not-so-private, with the U.S. and some European nations working on laws allowing them access to search the content held on a person's hard drive.

President Obama's administration is keeping unusually tight-lipped on the details, which is raising concerns among computer users and liberty activists.

Almost everyone today owns a music player and a laptop. But what if the Government decided to allow itself to access these personal devices for no specific reason whatsoever?

In extreme secrecy from the public, the Obama administration is hammering out an international copyright treaty with several other countries and the European Union.

Under the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), governments will get sweeping new powers to search and seize material thought to be in breach of copyright.

While the Obama administration calls these secretive plans a development of national security, Richard Stallman, a prominent American software freedom activist, calls it a secret war on sharing-http://youtu.be/vrug3kXZNfU

When Poland announced its intentions to sign the treaty on 18 January 2012 a number of Polish government websites, including those of the President and Polish Parliament, were shut down by denial of service attacks that started January 21, akin to protests against SOPA and PIPA that had happened two days previous. Notwithstanding the ongoing protests, the Polish ambassador to Japan signed the treaty, as ordered by the Polish authorities, though whether it is going to be ratified by the Parliament and the President remains to be seen.

...

On 26 January 2012 a group of Polish politicians expressed disapproval of the treaty by holding up Guy Fawkes masks during parliamentary proceedings. Mike Masnick of Techdirt noted that the handmade masks were themselves symbolically "counterfeit", as Time Warner owns intellectual property rights to the masks and typically expects royalties for their depiction.-Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

I remember listening to Irwin Schiff (father of Peter Schiff) many years ago on local radio talk station KABC out of LA with host Ray Briem, as Schiff was a guest on the show many times. Briem would always advise listeners not to take Irwin's advice and instead stay within the law while fighting the income tax.

Seems awfully staged. But most kids today probably haven't seen LP records as it's not like they're lying around most houses these days. You can still buy new records of course (you have to know where to get them), as the discerning music aficionado knows their superiority.

I search for the gems of wisdom and obvious truth (and then bring them to you), and found a shining example in the paragraphs immediately below (from The Dollar Vigilante)

Government is imaginary, as are the borders they claim denote the area where they profess to have a monopoly on violence.

The violence and theft that people do in the name of government is very real, however, and unfortunately the consequences of their self-declared authority are not an illusion. But it is important to realize that the entire world is in a state of anarchy. It always has been and always will be. The only reason it doesn't feel that way is because many people have been fooled into believing that the largest criminal organization in each region is a legitimate and necessary thing. Like the money they print, their authority is fiat. It only exists because they themselves claim it. And, as long as the majority of people believe that, then Government will continue to hold its grip over most people's lives.

But, as powerful as the government can appear to be, it is also incredibly fragile. It only takes a few people pointing out the truth to instantly awaken many others.

Hockey Players Supplicating to the Biggest Crime Boss in the Region
That is why what Tim Thomas, the goaltender for the Boston Bruins did yesterday was so notable. Thousands and thousands of grown men have accepted an invitation by a serial killer and thief to stand beside him and grin and get their photos taken. Not one, in all that time, has had either the intelligence to see the President for what he is or the courage to decline his invitation.-Tim Thomas is a Libertarian Hero

Then there is T.C.'s post on the topic (with the mysterious statement "I didn't even publish it until now." from the master blogger - yeah, right, T.C., and I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you):

Who died and left the White House the spiritual holder of his (or anybody's really) body, reason and soul? Hey, if it were me, I'd probably go since I always wanted to go see if Lincoln's ghost actually exists but I don't begrudge someone for exercising their right to...whatever.

And don't think for one second some people would have reacted the same if he had done under Dubya because we all know he would have been seen as a hero "fighting for his rights."-The Thomas-White House Affair

In order to simulate various flavors in processed foods, some food manufacturers are actually using aborted fetal cells to test and produce these artificial chemical enhancers that millions of Americans consume every single day. Concerned about the ethical and moral implications of such a process, Oklahoma Senator Ralph Shortey has introduced new legislation to prohibit this practice from occurring in his home state.

But, the inmates have been running the asylum for a long time now, haven't they? I mean, it's nothing new (and I'm talking about both parties, which are really one party, but that's a subject for another time).

If you thought the 2012 State of the Union was very similar to President Obama's past State of the Union speeches, you were right...

Damn, Bret could have just reposted his "live blogging" from last year. Who would have known the difference?

RON PAUL RESPONDS TO OBAMA’S STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH

LAKE JACKSON, Texas – See below for 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul’s response to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address.

“Tonight, President Obama once again showed that he does not represent the fundamental change this country needs. Instead of offering solutions to the problems our country faces, the President was intent on delivering a campaign speech, further dealing in the typical Washington political gamesmanship that has gotten us exactly nowhere close to improving the lives of the American people.

“In a speech where much of the rhetoric was devoted to job creation, it was strange that President Obama would brag about his job-destroying national health care plan, Obamacare, and the Dodd-Frank bill, which, contrary to the President’s claims, guarantees future taxpayer bailouts of large institutions. Unfortunately, President Obama’s ‘job creation’ policies amount to little more than continuing to allow government bureaucrats to pick winners and losers, which is a recipe for continued economic stagnation.

“President Obama claims to want an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules. Yet he remains committed to the same old system of debt, deficits, bailouts, and cronyism that created our economic problems. The President speaks of giving us energy independence from unstable nations, yet he refuses to allow the type of development needed to achieve this goal, while at the same time his administration hands out favors to the politically connected – those given to the likes of Solyndra, who fail to produce jobs or energy but succeed in ripping off the taxpayers.

“Of course, President Obama refuses to even mention the role the Federal Reserve plays in creating an economic system where some are denied a fair shot or even to support my efforts at bringing transparency to the Federal Reserve. Also not mentioned by President Obama is the very crucial need for reining in spending and balancing the federal budget. What is called by some ‘the greatest threat to our national security’ seems not to be of great importance to this President, although I, like many Americans, believe it to be cause for immediate measures, like the $1 trillion in spending cuts that would take place in my first year as President under my Plan to Restore America.

“In the area of foreign policy and civil liberties, President Obama’s rhetoric may be different, but the substance of his polices – as shown by his administration’s defense of the TSA’s treatment of my son, Senator Rand Paul, is hardly ‘change we can believe in.’ No wonder more and more Americans, especially young people, are rejecting the phony alternatives of Obama and establishment Republicans and embracing my campaign to Restore America Now.”

You can use olive oil to fry with, but you have to be careful with it, as cheaper olive oils have a lower smoke point, and you shouldn't heat an oil above that temperature. I almost exclusively use olive oil now, and have stopped buying salad dressing and just use oil and vinegar on my salads. For frying I sometimes use real butter (there is no other kind, and nothing else like it -sorry "I Can't Believe It's Not Butter") but just as often just bring out the bottle of oil (and you even have to be careful about that:

But back to frying. Eating fried food alone (depending on what kind of oil you use) does not increase heart disease risk:

The latest study, published in the British Medical Journal, found no association between the frequency of fried food consumption in Spain - where olive and sunflower oils are mostly used - and the incidence of serious heart disease.-Fried food heart risk 'a myth'

@8:50
Tonight, I’m joined in commenting on the State of the Union by a Doctor of Sociology and Demography who studied at an Ivy League university (the party one). She specializes in Economic Sociology and Demography, and is a published author on the topics of work, family and gender. Please welcome, my wife, Dr. AE.

As always, please feel free to leave comments. The Applause Break Counter will begin once the speech has started, and I won’t be counting the final applause break after the speech is over.

@8:59
We haven’t picked a network to watch the speech, but I’ll be sure to let you know what we settle on. It will depend upon who has the best info graphics. If we flip through and see a reaction meter of some kind, we’ll probably settle on that channel. Otherwise, I imagine we’ll settle on MSNBC, CNN or Current TV. My wife is pushing for Current, but we don’t have Current in HD, so I’m hoping MSNBC or CNN pull through with good coverage. The First Lady has entered the chamber, and we’re awaiting the intro of the President.

@9:02
The human props are walking onto the floor, now. There’s a lot of focus on Gabby Giffords, who will be attending her last address, but I imagine the president won’t be mentioning her much. She’s been in the news lately, however, so all cameras seem to be on her.

@9:05
The president has just been introduced. It will clearly take him some time, since he has to shake hands (and apparently kiss) people all the way to the podium. This might take 10 minutes, so a good chance to use the restroom.

@9:09

He’s close, he’s shaking hands with the Supreme Court…

@9:10
Obama is embracing Giffords, and I’m hearing that Mitch Daniels (Governor of Indiana) will give the Republican rebuttal.

@9:11
We’ll be watching on CNN.

@9:12
Standing ovation for dead Bin Laden.

@9:14
If only we were all like the military! (Applause)

@9:15
An economy not reliant on unstable parts of the world? Sorry, Alabama...

@9:16
Why are these people standing up to applaud the American dream they’re ruining?

@9:18
3 million jobs for 8 millions lost... so close.

@9:19
“The state of the union is getting stronger.”

@9:20
True, GM is the #1 producer of automobiles, having passed Toyota this month.

@9:23
Addressing taxes, outsourcing and jobs... took you only three years.

@10:12
My wife is sure she just saw someone with half a mustache. I thought it was just blonder on one side, or maybe light hitting it funny.

@10:16
My wife thought it was a strong finish, by reminding us he killed Osama (she’s a Democrat...), and using the event to bring us to a metaphor about working together. She admits to losing interest a little during it, but still a strong ending.

So director Oliver Stone has common sense and is not just a blind, unthinking Ron Paul hater, like some lying "liberal" fools.

In an interview with Rock Cellar magazine, Stone was asked if an economic collapse would lead to the fall of the American “empire.”

“I think it’s a given,” Stone said. “There’s no way that we can continue this spending spree. In fact, I think in many ways the most interesting candidate — I’d even vote for him if he was running against Obama — is Ron Paul. Because he’s the only one of anybody who’s saying anything intelligent about the future of the world.”

The Praetorian Class includes members of the Armed Services, federal, state and local law enforcement personnel as well as numerous militarized officials including agents from the DEA, Immigrations, Customs Enforcement, Air Marshalls, US Marshalls, and more. It also includes, although to a lesser extent, various stage actors in the expanding security theater such as TSA personnel. The main mission of the Praetorian Class is to keep the order of the day. This requires displaying an intimidating presence in their interactions with the Economic Class.

As the Praetorian Class ascends, the clear, albeit unstated, message that emerges is that actions and events in the Economic Class only occur with its tacit consent. Whether driving on roads, traveling in the air, visiting public land, walking down the street or even living in your own home, every action you take is predicated on its permission. By preconditioning the populace to enforcement of its edicts, most of which are completely arbitrary, the Praetorian Class sets itself up for a high degree of autonomy in its actions. This is confirmed by the fact that consequences for malfeasance within the Praetorian Class are almost never observed, and when it happens, it typically becomes a grotesque spectacle in which one of their own is sacrificed as an example, so as to keep appearances of effective internal controls.

The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

Karl Franz Ochstradt, while commenting on the lying Supremes "landmark" GPS tracking ruling. (the same black-robed tyrants that consistently uphold the "legality" of outrageous violations of the 4th Amendment).

The police have always been thugs who protect the moneyed. If ever you suffer the foolish assumption that the police are here to protect you and serve you, you should try pushing your luck on whatever chosen "civil right" you think is most important, and see how The PoPo treat you in that luck-pushing.-constructive destruction

In a single day of glory, January 18, a major portion of the Web went dark as a warning that we will no longer tolerate the Copyright Nazis’ infringements on our speech.

The next day, with the FBI’s takedown of MegaUpload, they showed us the law doesn’t even matter to them — that they never needed SOPA in the first place. And they really didn’t. For the past few years, the FBI has seized the domain names of alleged “intellectual property infringers” through in rem actions and civil forfeiture. SOPA was just a legal fig leaf. As Center for a Stateless Society (C4SS) Media Coordinator Tom Knapp argues, regardless of whether SOPA passes, its substance will still be implemented piecemeal through executive action.

But only hours after the MegaUpload takedown, Anonymous showed us the real way to fight back against the Copyright Nazis. The good guys’ sites went dark on Wednesday; the bad guys’ sites went dark on Thursday. The websites of the US Department of Justice, FBI, MPAA, RIAA, and dozens of media companies were taken down by distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks.

The beauty of it is, this was an an impromptu action using Anonymous’ “Low Orbit Ion Cannon” attack from our grandparents’ day, all of two years ago. DDOS isn’t hacking a site; it’s the equivalent of tearing down a poster — taking a site temporarily offline by overloading it with traffic. In contrast, during the past year, Anonymous has actually infiltrated major corporate and institutional websites — like those of HBGary, Texas law enforcement, the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), and Stratfor — and published reams of highly embarrassing internal emails and memos. This is called a “doxing” attack. Just my guess, but I imagine we can expect something similar to happen to the MPAA, Chris Dodd, and assorted Big Content companies starting any day now.

The ultimate response, rather than trying to fight for reform within the system, is simply rendering the Copyright Nazis’ filthy laws — whatever they are — unenforceable. As C4SS board member Charles Johnson has argued, a gram of circumvention is worth a metric ton of lobbying. Let the wicked write whatever laws on paper they see fit; the righteous will break them, as Samson broke iron chains like bands of tow.

The seizure of MegaUploads’ domain name is a shot across the bow, a warning to companies who store and transfer large files through the Cloud, for entirely “legitimate” reasons (under the existing copyright monopoly), that their data is vulnerable to lawless action by the state. The Copyright Nazis’ rentacops in the FBI are only creating a powerful incentive for websites to migrate to servers in places outside the American Gestapo’s control. Iceland, an emerging free information haven, is a good candidate.

The American state’s decline into fascism is also creating powerful incentives for Internet users here behind the USA’s DRM Curtain to adopt Tor routers and circumvention tools like the Firefox DeSopa extension. The latter extension automatically routes to a site’s actual numeric IP address when the domain name is shut down. (MegaUpload is already back up and accessible at its IP address, http://109.236.83.66/, by the way).

Totalitarian regimes in China and Iran are unable to prevent their citizens from using such means to access information in the Free World. The Lords of Scarcity and their hired thugs in the American state, likewise, are unable to prevent Americans from breaching the Great Firewall and communicating freely with the Free World.

There’s also another promising avenue of attack. Just about every day or two, Mike Masnick at Techdirt mentions another example of some Copyright Nazi Congresscritter or Big Content company whose own website includes copyrighted material without permission. If SOPA passes, we need to start actively flagging all such content, calling Joe Biden’s 800 anonymous snitch number, or whatever is necessary to subject the Copyright Nazis to a costly war of attrition under their own laws. In fact, by using government coercion against us, they’ve put themselves outside the law and made themselves lawful spoils of war — why does the violation even have to be real, so long as the complaint is anonymous?

By setting itself up as the World Hegemon enforcing artificial scarcity and information lockdown, the United States will simply reduce itself and its satellites to the position of a closed, squalid, and declining society, shut off from a surrounding world of free, open, and agile networks. And in the end, it will relegate itself to the ash heap of history.

Monday, January 23, 2012

But in one key way, Romney is pure Wall Street. A review of his personal financial disclosure records shows that a chunk of Romney's wealth—he's worth an estimated $190 million to $250 million—comes from investments in an array of Wall Street banks and investment houses, none more so than Goldman Sachs.

Romney and his wife, Ann, have investments in nearly three-dozen various Goldman funds together valued at between $17.7 million to $50.5 million, according to a financial disclosure form filed in August 2011. Those investments appear in the blind trusts and individual retirement accounts belonging to the Romneys. Romney's been a loyal Goldman Sachs client. His 2007 disclosure, filed before his first presidential run, showed Goldman investments valued at between $18.2 million and $51.5 million.-Mitt Romney: Goldman Sachs Guy

Fellow tax paying units, the war has begun. Already, Federal authorities have raided the home of a German national who ran a file sharing website. Sure he was eccentric, and probably arrogant, but at the end of the day he was providing a service to meet a consumer need.

United States authorities have shutdown Megaupload and claimed that said website has cost copyright holders at least $500 million. If you knew anything about economics, then you would know that this statement is utterly ridiculous and that this man’s arrest (known as Kim Dotcom) was nothing more than a power play in order to control the Internet.

The power elites do not like competition. Make no mistake: I doubt that President Obama had anything to do with this other than relay orders from his handlers. The power elites, whoever they may be, are not happy that their gravy trains are losing money and that people are able to share entertainment. The arts have a long history in modern times of influencing people and thus controlling people. If you control the people behind the entertainment of the dumb masses, then you can effectively control the dumb masses.

I know that this is getting a little more crackpot than usual, but consider this: there was no crime in having a file sharing website. There are plenty of them out there and it amazes me that Megaupload go singled out by the Attorney General. By the way, did you know that we sent FBI agents to New Zealand to arrest this man? That has to violate some article of the constitution somewhere. At the very least, it demonstrates how the United States Government is not the world’s police, but the world’s bully.

As the economy gets worse and worse, I fully expect more actions such as these to go on. When you start to lose everything you’ve gained, you become more and more desperate. For many of the common man, it is merely a glitch in the system, where you might find an occasional breakdown resulting in violence. But when it starts happening to the world power brokers, they start to get more and more tyrannical.

Despite this, people do not appreciate being treated as slaves (or tax paying units), especially when they had a better life when they were not slaves. They will not respond well to what is going on, as witnessed by what Anonymous did to DOJ, MPAA.org, and RIAA.org.

For all you conservatives out there who think that this isn’t a big deal, you need to understand that like TARP, this is corporatism on display. In a truly free market, none of this would have happened as copyright would not exist and the government would not bend to the will of a corporate cabal.

The Internet is a powerful tool that has reduced all men and women down to their individual identities rather than grouping all of us together like what has been done in the past centuries. National allegiance, race, gender, creed, and many other things are almost non-existence on the Internet as people identify themselves by name, not by group.

The old dinosaurs who sit in the hollowed halls of power do not like that they cannot pit us against each other as well anymore. With Generation X and the younger ones rapidly figuring out many of their scams, we will see a new world bore out of the one. They will get their New World Order, but not the one they hoped to create.

As a sort of annual tradition here at SE, I’ll be live blogging the president’s State of the Union Address tomorrow night (Tuesday).

Basically, I’ll just be sitting at home in front of the TV and computer, updating a single blog post throughout the address with highlights, thoughts, criticisms, fact-checking, rude remarks, and a new feature this year, the live Applause-Break Counter.

I’m even considering taking bets on the number of applause-breaks there are. His first SOTU had 61, his second had 89, and his third had 76, giving him a 75.3 AB avg.

Sunday, January 22, 2012

I wish there was cozy talk on television. I mean, where someone gives a talk about something, like a famous author (Dickens, Twain, Bret Alan) and they're sitting in a big comfy chair in front of a fireplace in a wood-lined room with lots of book shelves with books on them (but those fancy, leather-bound volumes) and the fire is crackling really good. You can hear the sound of the fire burning in the background, and maybe there is even a storm brewing outside and you can sort of hear the rain, too.

I'd watch it. I wish there was such a channel. I'm tired of hearing talks where someone is standing behind a podium in a cold, drab setting.

Whatever his other shortcomings, I get plenty of entertainment from watching Mitt Romney on the news. His personality type — privileged white boy, executive-type hair, born with a silver foot in his mouth — reminds me of how much I miss Dan Quayle. And he — and his defenders — have certainly provided entertainment value the past few days.

Romney’s primary opponents have been jumping on him for his record at Bain Capital — referring to it, variously, as a “chop shop” or “vulture capitalist” operation that buys up enterprises, downsizes their workforces, strips them of assets, loads them up with debt as cash cows, then throws them away.

Their criticism comes across as somewhat less than authentic; when, under any other circumstances, has someone like Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin or Rick Perry had a problem with that model of capitalism? For that matter, what Romney did as a venture capitalist is essentially what Fortune 500 companies do with all the corporations they acquire from mergers and acquisitions — and frequently with the enterprises they already owned. That’s just what most pointy-haired MBAs do. So one suspects an element of disingenuousness in the moral outrage coming from Gingrich and Perry.

But what’s really hilarious is the response from Romney and his surrogates. Some Romney flack on a talking head show wrung her hands over what a shame it was to hear “criticism of the free market” coming from Republicans. And whoever’s turn it was inside the barrel writing boilerplate for the WSJ editorial page clutched their pearls at such “crude and damaging caricatures of modern business and capitalism,” calling on Romney to “base his claim to office on a defense of the system of free enterprise that has enriched America over the decades and is now under assault.”

Romney himself is aghast at “class warfare” and the “politics of envy” from Republicans who sound like “socialists,” scolding that “President Obama wants to put free enterprise on trial. … In the last few days, we have seen some desperate Republicans join forces with him.”

Hearing all these encomiums on “free enterprise,” and equations of the Romney vulture capitalist model of “modern business and capitalism” to the “free market,” reminds me of an old Russian joke from the Brezhnev years.

Brezhnev, on the occasion of a visit from his old mother from her rural village, went out of his way to impress on her that he’d made good. He showed her his closet full of tailored suits. They rode around in his chauffeured Zil, visited his vacation dacha on the Crimean Sea, and went shopping at the GUM department store for which only the Soviet elite had membership cards. The old lady remained silent through the whole tour. Finally, the disappointed Brezhnev pressed her for a reaction. “This is all very nice, Leonid,” she said. “But what will happen to you if the communists take over?”

Forty years later and on the other side of the world, listen to this gaggle of crony capitalists, monopolists, corporate welfare queens, Gordon Gekko wannabes, and pet ideologists at Pravda (ahem — The Wall Street Journal) talk about our “free enterprise system” makes me want to ask: “That’s all very nice, Mitt. But what will you do if the free marketers take over?”

When a genuine free market comes to America, I expect the Fortune 500 and the banksters will fare about as well as would Brezhnev & Co. had the workers taken over.

In a sense, Mitt and his stooges are correct to refer to criticism as “class warfare.” As Prussian strategist Karl von Clausewitz argued, a war is not started by the country that moves its troops across a frontier. The invader would like nothing better than to carry off the invasion without a single gunshot. The actual war starts when the invaded country’s army starts shooting back. Likewise, a lot of sensible folks like to point out that we’ve had a class war for all of human history — it’s been waged by the privileged, exploiting classes on the rest of us. But to be perfectly accurate, it only becomes a genuine class war when we start fighting back.

Saturday, January 21, 2012

With the Iowa recount and the results of South Carolina, three of the remaining four candidates have a victory under their belt. This is in sharp contrast to midweek, when Romney was a 2-0 and favored to win SC.

Romney is still the frontrunner, but there’s no ignoring his loss of momentum going into Florida. Romney finished 4th in SC in 2008, so very few Romney supporters are surprised at his second place finish this year.

Gingrich probably carried the conservative vote over Santorum on the strength of his debate performances. He may have actually gained from the publicity surrounding the release of his wife’s interview Thursday night, as Republicans are wont to crucify a victim and back a scoundrel.

Even with Santorum’s “win” in Iowa, it’s hard to imagine a path forward for him. If he drops out now, it’s entirely possible Gingrich could carry the votes necessary to win some more key states.

While it’s not impossible, it’s still unlikely that the Gingrich campaign, as it stands now, has the legs to go the distance. More monetary support would need to materialize, and Gingrich will need people to continue focusing on what he says today, not what he’s done in the past.

While it’s certainly fair-play to go after a man who maligned Bill Clinton for his relationship with Monica Lewinsky and who defends the “sanctity” of heterosexual marriage, it’s his unsavory political history rife with corruption and cronyism that could sink his campaign. If people catch wind of his ethics violations and tax problems, it may not bode well for him.

Going forward, Florida is another seemingly easy win for Romney… much like South Carolina was meant to be. Romney is polling with a double-digit lead well ahead of the primary, much like he was in SC. These same polls do show one unique feature: Santorum and Gingrich alternate between which is in second place.

Paul is openly passing over Florida, preferring to spread his limited cash among smaller races where his campaign feels confident he can pick up delegates. His focus appears to be on Nevada and Minnesota.

Florida is the largest early primary state, and the media markets are some of the country’s most expensive. Romney’s monetary advantage may be a huge factor, as will the presence of many Northern retirees.

One question many were asking before South Carolina was whether regionalism was dead. However, it seems the political divide between the Northeast and the South remains intact. There is not another truly Southern state primary again until Super Tuesday, when Georgia and Virginia primaries are held concurrently with 5 other primaries and 3 caucuses on March 6th.

Romney is projected to perform well in the coming races, but his advantage is highly contingent on what happens with the rest of the candidates. The worst thing that could happen to Romney is for Santorum to either drop out early, or for Santorum’s supporters to flock to Gingrich. Even in this worst-case scenario, several states would still be easily carried by Romney (like Maine and Michigan).

In any case, the race has avoided becoming too boring. While it won’t help Romney’s chances in the general election if his opponents continue battering him in debates and campaign ads, it might have been worse for Romney to have simply swept the nomination process. At least now Republicans can feel like the nomination wasn’t bought outright.

House floor speech on the unconstitutional provisions of the NDAA bill:

Wow, that crazy Ron Paul actually supports civil liberties and the Bill of Rights! What a "crackpot on the fringe"!

Texas Congressman and GOP presidential contender Ron Paul is continuing his battle for liberty even as he is focused on his fight for the White House. This week, he introduced legislation to overturn the dangerous provisions found within the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

Rep. Paul spoke on the House floor, specifically against Section 1021 of the NDAA, which includes language which permits the government to detain anyone who “substantially supported al Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States.” Paul fears — as do a number of other opponents to the law — that the language can be used against U.S. citizens as well.-Ron Paul Introduces Bill to Repeal NDAA's Indefinite Detention

In a January 18 interview with Glenn Beck Rick Santorum decided to compare his view of the Constitution with that of Ron Paul. His statements can only be described as delusional and totalitarian.

Santorum first claimed to have read an eighteenth-century dictionary that defined happiness as "to do the morally right thing." This is how the founding fathers defined happiness, he said. This is Santorum’s definition of "happiness," not the founding fathers. It’s a good bet he is lying when claiming to have read an eighteenth-century dictionary. (But I suppose anything is possible with a man who brought his deceased infant home who died two hours after birth and slept with it after showing it to his children, as Santorum admits to have done).

The freedom to do whatever you want to do – as long as you do not harm anyone else or interfere in their equal freedom – would "lead to libertinism and lead to chaos" said Sanctimonious Santorum, who has also pledged to do what he can to put an end to contraception if elected president. Contraception changes "the way things ought to be," he says. Santorum is self assured that he, and he alone, understands "the way things ought to be" and pledges to use the powers of the state to forcefully impose his "understanding" on the entire country.

But the founding fathers are known as champions of freedom, are they not? But what kind of freedom? According to Santorum, who apparently fancies himself as an historian, freedom in America means "the freedom to do what you ought to do – what you are properly ordered to do [by a politician like himself] – as someone living a good, decent, and ordered life" (emphasis added). "That’s the differentiation that I believe Ron Paul and I have with respect to what liberty is," said Santorum. To Rick Santorum, "freedom" means doing what government "properly" orders you to do, as long as government is controlled by good, proper, moral people like himself, the K-Street lobbyist for the Pennsylvania coal mining industry (and anyone else who will pay his huge fees for influence peddling).

This is not the view of the American founding fathers, as Santorum claims. It is more likely to have been the mindset of the founders of the Soviet Union, not the American union. It is the mindset of the neoconservatives whose founding members were, after all, Trotskyite communists. This includes the self-described "godfather" of neoconservatism, the late Irving Kristol, who reveled in talking about his youthful Trotskyite roots.

If Santorum really wanted to know how the founding fathers defined freedom he would not make up imaginary, two-century old dictionary entries but would read what the founders actually said. A good place to start would be Thomas Jefferson’s first inaugural address where he stated: "[A] wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government . . ." It is hard to imagine that Jefferson, the author of the 1786 Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom that strongly opposed the governmental imposition of any religious views on anyone while defending religious liberty in general, would have admired an Uber-Catholic Theocrat like Santorum. For government to compel a man to support a religious cause with which he disbelieves, wrote Jefferson, is "sinful and tyrannical."

When Ron Paul says that such victimless crimes as prostitution or smoking pot should be decriminalized, says Santorum, "that’s not the moral foundation of our country," once again pretending to be The Expert on the thinking of the founding fathers. There’s one problem with Santorum’s historical revisionism, however. Prostitution was in fact pervasive in Colonial America. Prostitutes traveled with George Washington’s army, serving as nurses and cooks as well as prostitutes. In fact, there were no laws in America banning prostitution until Massachusetts enacted the first one in 1917. (The 1910 "Mann Act," named after Congressman James Mann, prohibited "white slavery" for the purpose of prostitution). Federal laws against prostitution were first enacted after women got the right to vote and immediately outlawed prostitution in the vicinity of military bases when their husbands and boyfriends were off serving in the military. In other words the founding fathers agreed with Ron Paul, not Rick Santorum, on personal liberty issues.

America is "not just a collection of freedoms," said the insufferably sanctimonious Santorum. It is, instead, a collection of orders from the state defining what "proper" behavior is. Stalin himself could not have said it better.

Some people have missed my point about Sick Rantorum and his claim that happiness means doing what is moral. That's not all that he said. The key point here is that Rantorum also said that this means "doing what you are ordered to do" by the state. The Newt Gingriches, Bill Clintons, and Sick Rantorums will define for us what is moral, and then use the state's powers of imprisonment, taxation, execution, torture, etc. to force us to live like they want us to live. In other words, some of the most immoral people in society, who have gotten to where they are by being masterful liars, connivers, and manipulators, will force us to live our lives in their image. Quoting ancient Catholic theologians or founding generation politicians on the subject of happiness is therefore irrelevant unless they, too, were totalitarians like Rantorum.

Rantorum gave an interview to a major news network to describe the story about bringing his deceased infant home, presumably to boost his image as a right to life candidate. He went on and on in the interview about how this really, really proved his bona fides as a "pro-life candidate." It was a political stunt, in other words. This is why the story is worth mentioning — it speaks volumes about the character of this man who wants to have his finger on the nuclear button, and in the name of being "pro-life" is just itching to murder thousands of innocent Iranians (for starters).-Thomas DiLorenzo (Missing the Point About Santorum)

And Sick Rantorum's view of "liberty" is telling in regard to his statements during the last Republican debate on SOPA and PIPA, where he said "“The Internet is not a free zone where anybody can do anything they want to do..." I guess that means he would let you do only what he thinks is "moral and right" while you're online.

It’s kind of a shame there are four candidates, because there should be three, one for each of the strains of conservatism that are popular in America now.

We’ll start with Paul, since no one else ever does. Paul represents a diverse sub-group of the right. They include the Libertarians, young conservatives, conspiracy theorists, Neo-Nazis, anarchists, minarchists, Constitutional originalists, anti-Federalists, anti-United Nationists, and I’m sure some people I’m leaving out. Paul isn’t all of those things (I think he’s a conspiracy theorist, but he’s not a racist… it’s just that some of his ideas on removing protections for minorities appeal to racists). Rather, those are just some of the types of people who back him.

Santorum/Gingrich are typical Neocons in the same vein as Bush. They invoke Reagan, though rarely side with any of his policies, except as they pertain to lowering taxes. They were over-represented in this race, as Michele Bachman and Rick Perry were both also this type of Republican. This group is heavy with Evangelical Christians, and they rally around social wedge issues like opposition to gay marriage and abortion. This type is usually supported by the stereotypical stupid, uneducated Tea Bagger that the rest of us have come to know and loathe.

Herman Cain might be seen as one of these Neocons, but he’s really more like Romney than most people would probably imagine. Those in Romney’s camp rally around successful people, often businessmen (or in Reagan’s case, an actor). The Republicans who support these kind of candidates are more pragmatic than ideological, more realistic than idealistic, and they make up what might be seen as the educated moderates of the Republican party.

Romney is going to win the nomination, not on the strength of the moderate vote in the Republican party, but thanks to the sheer number of traditional Neocons in the race. While Huntsman is a clone of Romney, nearly all the voters in that camp went with Romney, which is why Huntsman gave up. While the departure of Perry will likely result in more consolidation of the Neocon vote, it is still split between Santorum and Gingrich, who both trail Romney by double digit figures in South Carolina and Florida.

What’s more, Gingrich was the clear national favorite over Santorum, but it’s likely that the revelation of details regarding his philandering will not play well among women or social conservatives. Everything has been going wrong for the Neocon candidates since day one, and Romney has weathered the storm by simply not being wretched human scum.

The bar is incredibly low, and Romney has managed to keep his nose clean on all matters Republicans care about. Sure, he’s rich thanks to his father and he has been gaming the tax system, but Republicans don’t care about that. Every Republican imagines he will one day be rich… though I’m not sure how it’s possible to just one day wake up and have been born into a wealthy family. Maybe they believe in reincarnation…

At any rate, the race will undoubtedly be shaken up by South Carolina. Expect at least one candidate to drop out before Florida, and if current numbers are anything to go by, it will be Santorum. Even if there’s a three-man race going into Florida, Gingrich will still be an underdog to take Florida.

Ron Paul will probably have a poor showing in both South Carolina and Florida, though look for him to at least beat Stephen Colbert in South Carolina (who is being represented by those who vote Herman Cain; he cannot get on the ballot, but he can have people vote for candidates on the ballot who have dropped out). Paul will shine in the coming races, where he may garner big support in Nevada, Colorado, and/or Minnesota. He may also beat any Neocon candidate still in the race when Maine’s week-long caucus ends on February 11th.

Super Tuesday seems so far away (March 6th). It’s almost inconceivable for more than two candidates to still be in it, but Neocons are adamant about Gingrich staying in the race. If this turns out to be the case, Romney will have a rough general election to look forward to. Paul and Romney both run the kinds of campaigns that don’t leave the other crippled, but Gingrich has a scorched earth strategy that is bound to make him a serious threat to Romney’s electability come November, though Gingrich has almost no chance of winning the nomination himself.

What do you think? Is Romney a shoe-in to win the nomination? What are his chances against Obama? Will Romney and Gingrich get hit by a meteor, catapulting Ron Paul to the status of front runner?

Statist idiot Bill O'Reilly was pontificating the other day about how evil Ron Paul is because Paul wants to end the Federal drug war. Paul's main point in the segment of debate O'Really was talking about was the unjust incarceration of minorities in our hell-hole prisons for non-violet drug "crimes". Bill the horse's ass then made the bold claim that selling drugs is a violent crime because of all the havoc they inflict on society (a collectivist view to start with from a supposed believer in individualism) , thereby imposing his personal dislike of drugs (though I'm guessing he enjoys America's drug of choice, alcohol) on everyone by banning them. By his logic, of course, bars, liquor stores and alcohol manufacturers are all extremely violent criminals, but statists in general are always lacking when it comes to logical reasoning and consistency (because it's impossible for a statist to be consistent in the first place) . His view is no different from enviromentalist loon statists who advocate things like the incandescent light bulb ban (already I can no longer purchase regular 100 watt bulbs; thanks, asswipes!).

Which brings me to T.C and his post, which I republish below.

Ever notice how effortlessly liberals and conservatives use the word "ban" when it comes to a social problem they deem important?
They just don't grasp that "banning" something creates a criminal under ground and puts people in jail for non-violent crimes.

How about this concept for a change: Mind you business.

Incredible that in this day and age someone would suggest banning something - like cigarettes.

Rick Perry appears poised to drop out of the race today, just two days before the South Carolina primary where he and his associated political action committees spent over $2.5 million. This comes on the heels of news that Perry is not even polling first in his home state of Texas.

It’s hard to pinpoint a single moment where his campaign derailed. Most people would point to his public struggle to remember which three departments of the federal government he would shutter, but there were many other moments which I think would have been more meaningful to Republican voters.

Remember, this is the same party who voted for a marble-mouth like Bush. Perry’s support for educating the children of illegal immigrants probably lost him more support than his utter lack of poise. This really speaks to how pathetically cruel and ignorant the Republican Party has become.

In any case, Perry is out. I can only speculate as to why. Did he look at his single digit poll numbers in South Carolina, a state where he spent more money than anyone but Romney, and decide he didn’t even want to face the embarrassment? Did his donors realize failure was inevitable?

Perry is said to be officially endorsing Gingrich, but don’t expect much to come from that immediately. It’s doubtful that even the bulk of Perry’s supporters will flock to Gingrich. I think it’s quite likely his supporters will split between Romney, Santorum and Gingrich. There’s even a chance Paul will pick up some steam from this second candidate to drop out this week.

What I’m most unsure of is, what will become of the multimillion dollar Super PACs backing Perry? Since they are not officially associated with Perry, they may turn their support towards another candidate. They might also dissolve. I really have no clue how that works. I’m fairly sure that no one can just pocket the money, so I imagine either they will back new candidates (or rather, just keep attacking certain candidates), or they will remain active until the next relevant election.

In any case, Romney is still projected to grab another blow-out victory in South Carolina. Republicans love backing a winner, and Romney is the first non-incumbent to win both Iowa and New Hampshire. His nomination is almost assured.

Gingrich, perhaps for lack of money, has been personally vocal this week, making laughable claims and pandering to anyone he thinks he has a shot at getting to listen to him. He has boldly claimed that if he wins South Carolina, he will become president (though he also admitted that if he loses South Carolina, his run will be over). This morning, I found out he said that if elected President, he would select Sarah Palin for an important position, perhaps in a bid to reach out to Tea Party voters, among whom he is splitting support with Santorum.

If this plays out as I expect, Gingrich will not win South Carolina, though I question if he will drop out before Florida 10 days later. If he has a strong second place finish ahead of Santorum, I seriously question if he will drop out before Santorum. Don’t expect Paul to drop out, even if he never gets another second place finish until it’s down to just him and Romney. I have heard it said among some people that they think Paul will hold on until Super Tuesday, or even all the way until the convention.

At this point, Romney has to be glad to be rid of Huntsman and Perry, both of whom have actively attacked him of late. The campaign had entered a vicious phase leading up to New Hampshire, and it has truly culminated in a flurry of attack ads from all camps in South Carolina. The debates have largely been “Everyone vs. Romney” events since Iowa. Romney is the guy to beat, and everyone is giving him a beating.

In many ways, they are ensuring Obama’s re-election. Obama’s entire campaign is being written by Republican strategists. Terms like “vulture capitalist” may be making a comeback leading up to November. Coming from Obama, people might just write-off such claims as Socialist propaganda… but these are Republicans complaining about how Romney is abusing the system by using vast sums of cash.

Besides that, one can see a certain hostility for Romney among some Republicans. Sure, many just don’t like him, but they’ll begrudgingly hold their nose and vote for him. However, there are some who simply won’t vote for him. Not a lot, perhaps only just enough to matter in a race where a few hundred thousand votes in key states make all the difference. But what are the odds that such a situation will occur…

I don't know why this is suddenly an issue. People walking around with headphones blaring crap into their ears has been going on since pre-digital times (remember the original Sony Walkman audio cassette players?) and I never understood the need (isn't walking or running a joy in itself, with plenty to see along the way; isn't there happiness in just being alone with the sounds surrounding you and your own thoughts?).

I like listening to something while driving my car, but that's a different kind of experience to me. Unlike riding in an automobile, walking puts you directly in touch with your surroundings and forces you to interact with the environment you find yourself in.

But, if you are distracted, it can be dangerous. Even drunk driving is safer (and recommended by experts in certain circumstances) than drunk walking. You have a greater chance of dying by walking home drunk than you do getting in your car and driving a few blocks. Especially if you're walking drunk with headphones on.

Facebook

More Economic Depression News! More Fun! More Happiness! More Links! More Videos! More Jokes! More Cartoons! More Pro-Liberty Articles! More Fiction, Stories and Reviews! More Information Than Ever Before!

Learn About The Coming Depression Here!

This is your source for daily coming depression news! Email this site to your family, friends, co-workers! Spread the word so we can continue bringing you the best economic collapse news and links!

To be an individualist and libertarian is to understand that no one, anywhere, should ever be aggressed against by anyone, and that the state is the principal form of institutionalized aggression in our world.— Anthony Gregory

"Political tags, such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth, are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire."-- Robert A. Heinlein

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants."--Thomas Jefferson

"Our Bible reveals to us the character of our god with minute and remorseless exactness... It is perhaps the most damnatory biography that exists in print anywhere. It makes Nero an angel of light and leading by contrast." - Mark Twain

"The Bible tells us to be like God, and then on page after page it describes God as a mass murderer. This may be the single most important key to the political behavior of Western Civilization." - Robert Anton Wilson